Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Ordered to Pay PanOptis $506 Million for Violating LTE Patents
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
These patents are predominantly written with a wide brush. The details are vague and do not give actual instruction to the creation of said inventions. Like someone will sue everyone and their patent is “digitally sharing file over wireless medium” and then they try to get iMessage, FaceTime, email, etc.
Without knowing the standard deviation, the stats in the article you linked do not mecessarily show the difference is statisticslly significant. In the range of jury verdicts from $100k to $585M, the difference between $22M and $23M is not that much.
But here is something you probably didn’t know about EDTX: Plaintiffs lose in EDTX more often than in other high patent case districts. https://www.rpxcorp.com/intelligence/blog/juryverdicts/
Also, just anecdotally, the average amount awarded by a jury is mostly irrelevant when choosing a venue. Anything over $50M will be appealed, and anything over $100M will very likely be reduced by the CAFC. Plaintiffs care about other metrics: speedy time to trial, rate of denying stays pending IPR, rate of denying summary judgment, rate of granting discovery motions, general familiarity with patent law (many judges don’t know squat about patents and being in front of them sucks). All of those are more important factors than average amount awarded by jury.
No. PanOptis didn’t invent anything though. They brought patents - and probably underpaid as well.
Listen, I’m not playing this game. PanOptis have a bad rep of patent trolling.
You can defend them to the cows come home if you want, just know that I personally think they’re scum sucking low life bottom feeders, and if the whole business should be decimated tomorrow and their leaders imprisoned for life, it would bother me not a jot.
And that’s it.
In the meantime this will head to federal court and perhaps a better judgement.
In those situations that's the patent office's fault for approving those patents.
So all you have to do is close any businesses you have in eastern Texas and you can avoid patent trolls! Why doesn't everyone leave that side of the state lol, can't be worth the business! I guarantee if every tech business pulled out of that area they would have second thoughts on how they run their courts.
Aukey...the cell phone accessory maker... 😓
Aukey - Search results - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
“If it doesn’t have a tail it’s not a monkey.”
Like making actual working products and contributing hundreds of billions dollars to economy? Pstents trolls can teach Apple how to contribute nothing and still have a good life.
Where in the Constitution does it say that is the purpose of patents?
I guess because patent troll needed to apply themselves to know and practice everything there is about patent trolling and they got real good.
This ISN'T a Patent troll! They were lawfully in their rights to sue for infringement. Just because they are a billion dollar company, does not exclude them from ever being liable!
Apple could be considered a Patent Troll as well, with the amount of threatening letters and lawsuits if files. Whats good for the goose...
Their supposed business model is irrelevant.
Patenting inventions and ideas is legal. Selling those patents is legal. Buying patents is legal. Protecting what you own is legal. That's why Apple do all those things, too.
Ignoring other people's patents (because they're doing it wrong) isn't.
The same patent claims are being fought in Europe against the likes of Huawei, Samsung, Google, etc. This is not just an Apple vs. the world thing.
These cases are generally known as FRAND cases (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory).
Usually they are about the owner of the IP who doesn't want to grant a license or doesn't want to grant one on FRAND terms.
They have been in talks with apple about these terms and Apple has not agreed to them, hence they went to court.
It concerns (among others) patents subsidiaries of PanOptis bought from companies, like Ericsson for example, about essential technology to be able to use GSM, UMS and LTE in their devices. ie. ALL manufacturers that make use of mobile technology over GSM, UMS or LTE are in breach with these patents. PanOptis are fighting cases all over the world about these infringements, targeting the big players.
PanOptis, or subsidiaries of them, buy these patents with the express intent to sue companies for a ****load of money. This makes them patent trolls.
They do not represent the original inventors. This is their business model; offer the inventors a nice sum of money so PanOptis can sue companies like Apple, Google, Samsung, etc. for millions. This practice is not illegal.
Apple, and every other manufacturer of smart-things, does probably infringe on these patents. That is why they are willing to talk about an agreement.
However, these cases are the result of Apple not agreeing with the proposition made by PanOptis.
Apple should recognise patents more often. They do have a ton of leverage due to their size and wealth, which they sometimes exploit.
But paying shady companies like PanOptis is not the solution. They make money off the backs of the inventors just as much, or maybe even more, than companies like Apple do.
These cases are generally known as FRAND cases (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory).
Usually they are about the owner of the IP who doesn't want to grant a license or doesn't want to grant one on FRAND terms.
They have been in talks with apple about these terms and Apple has not agreed to them, hence they went to court.
It concerns (among others) patents subsidiaries of PanOptis bought from companies, like Ericsson for example, about essential technology to be able to use GSM, UMS and LTE in their devices. ie. ALL manufacturers that make use of mobile technology over GSM, UMS or LTE are in breach with these patents. PanOptis are fighting cases all over the world about these infringements, targeting the big players.
PanOptis, or subsidiaries of them, buy these patents with the express intent to sue companies for a ****load of money. This makes them patent trolls.
They do not represent the original inventors. This is their business model; offer the inventors a nice sum of money so PanOptis can sue companies like Apple, Google, Samsung, etc. for millions. This practice is not illegal.
Apple, and every other manufacturer of smart-things, does probably infringe on these patents. That is why they are willing to talk about an agreement.
However, these cases are the result of Apple not agreeing with the proposition made by PanOptis.
Apple should recognise patents more often. They do have a ton of leverage due to their size and wealth, which they sometimes exploit.
But paying shady companies like PanOptis is not the solution. They make money off the backs of the inventors just as much, or maybe even more, than companies like Apple do.
There will be an appeal, and the appeal will not be be in the Eastern District of Texas, without the Eastern District of Texas patent judge who made it his goal in life to help as many patent trolls as possible.
How is Apple a monopoly exactly? Literally everything they make you can get from another company.
If they own the patent, they own the patent. It shouldn’t matter if the owner is a “troll” or not, all that should matter is if Apple infringed on the patent or not.
If you have studied economics enough then you know that Apple does have monopoly pricing power. In fact, the point of brands is essentially to try to create that power, and Apple has a very strong brand. This should be obvious from their pricing, especially their pricing on RAM and SSD upgrades.
On my street, there is one provider for internet and tv. If we don't like their pricing or policies or management (or any of the other types of things that are discussed here related to Apple) we can get another tv provider like Dish but we're stuck without internet. That to me is a monopoly. Apple holding a minority share, not so much as I can easily get an Android and do similar things: get email, check facebook etc.